June 2011 Archive

On my Q3 research agenda is a document reviewing typical BI software pricing configurations. Unfortunately, I find that just asking vendors whether they have this or that pricing policy (by number of named users, number of concurrent users, server type, etc.) usually just gets me “Yes, we have it all” or “It depends” answers. Not really useful. So this time I plan to nail down the vendors to three specific quotes given three very specific configurations. Here’s my first cut at the RFQ. I plan to send it out to:

Categories:

From my first days as a baby architect, I was spoon-fed the idea that enterprise data management (EDM) was the solution to our data woes. Some call it enterprise information management or other names that mean a holistic approach to managing data that is business led and centered on stewardship and governance. The DMBOK provides a picture that describes this concept very well — check it out.

Here’s the problem: Most firms are not able to internalize this notion and act accordingly. There are myriad reasons why this is so, and we can all list off a bunch of them if we put our minds to it. Top of my list is that the lure of optimizing for next quarter often outweighs next year’s potential benefits.

Here’s another problem: Most EAs cannot do much about this. We are long-term, strategic people who can clearly see the benefits of EDM, which may lead us to spend a lot of time promoting the virtues of this approach. As a result, we get bloody bruises on our heads and waste time that could be spent doing more-productive things.

I do think that taking a long-term, holistic approach is the best thing to do; in my recently published report "Big Opportunities In Big Data," I encourage readers to maintain this attitude when considering data at extreme scale. We need to pursue short-term fixes as well. Let me go a step further and say that making short-term progress on nagging data management issues with solutions that take months not years is more important to our firms than being the EDM town crier. Hopefully my rationale is clear: We can be more effective this way as long as our recommendations keep the strategic in mind.

I was recently chatting with Jim Harris, the well-respected blogger-in-chief of the Obsessive-Compulsive Data Quality blog, about one of our favorite topics: data governance best practices. Our conversation migrated to one of data governance’s biggest challenges: how to balance bureaucracy and business agility.

So Jim and I thought it would be fun to tackle this dilemma in a Star Wars-themed debate across each of our individual blog platforms, with Jim taking the position for “Agility” as the Rebellion and me taking the opposing position for “Bureaucracy” as the Empire.

Note: Yes, most conversations between self-proclaimed data geeks tend to result in Star Wars or Star Trek parallels . . . and I lost the coin toss. Thankfully, I found StarWars.com to help me with some of my rusty Star Wars facts!

Disclaimer: Remember, this is meant to be a true debate format, where Jim and I are intentionally arguing polar opposite positions with full knowledge of the reality that data governance success requires effectively balancing bureaucracy and agility.

Please take the time to read both of our blog posts, then we encourage your comments — and your votes (see the poll below).